Unexplained Income Additions Under Section 69A Deleted Where Cash Withdrawals Were Redeposited Without Diversion

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The ITAT ruled that additions under section 69A regarding unexplained income were unjustified as the Assessing Officer failed to prove that cash withdrawals were used elsewhere before being redeposited. The Tribunal deleted additions related to sales of Renault Fluence and Santro cars where the appellant had furnished complete purchaser details. However, the addition for Mercedes Benz sale was sustained as the appellant failed to establish transaction genuineness beyond claiming it was sold through an agent. The Tribunal also upheld additions under section 68 for alleged joint venture contributions from Prabhatsinhji Thakor, as the appellant failed to demonstrate the contributor's creditworthiness. Similarly, additions under section 69A for purported bogus share sales were maintained due to insufficient evidence of cash payment from the purchasing company.....